-If the only argument in favor of hi-cap mags is "I need them for defense" then that's not only a weak argument but a pretty poor reflection on gun owners.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KyJim

Who said it was the only argument? It is an argument and, IMO, a darned good one.

I'm in 100% agreement with KyJim here. Critiques of the video notwithstanding, IMHO the self-defense argument is not only a good argument- it's one of the best ones we have.

Merad, I'm curious why you think it's so weak- on its philosophical merits, disregarding the video.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merad

I don't own hi-cap mags because I'm afraid of druggies kicking down my door. That's probably the least of my concerns. I own them because they're a convenience and they don't harm anyone or anything.

It would also be convenient if I could drive 150 mph on the freeway in light traffic, carry my EDC with me onto a commercial airliner, or walk down the street buck naked when the weather is hot.* (That last one would certainly help reduce my clothing budget. ) These activities arguably won't harm others if I'm prudent. Yet... as a society, we have decided that various factors make these behaviors inappropriate and/or too risky to tolerate, and we have passed laws prohibiting them.

IMHO convenience is a very weak argument. Many of the emotionally-charged "If It Saves Just One Child's Life..." arguments in favor of severe gun control are based on the flip side of the convenience argument- i.e. guns are ridiculously dangerous, and not very useful for any societally beneficial purpose in the hands of civilians, so it's appropriate to make it highly inconvenient for average folks own them.

*Let's not digress into discussing the merits of these ideas; I'm just being hypothetical. Cheers.

__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak

Last edited by carguychris; May 6, 2013 at 01:37 PM.
Reason: minor edits...

Not to derail the thread, but how many of your DA, semi auto., handguns,
can you dry fire, with the slide locked back ?

I think the sound effects were just the to make a point to non gun owners who don't know that the locked back slide means the gun is empty. The "click" is a universal sound for anyone who has seen a movie.

Boy, that video is hokey!!! First of all, the shooter has a horrible flinching problem - shuts his eyes every time he pulls the trigger.

Second, how many of you actually looked at the brass? It's .22 brass! Whoever made this video - please we really do notice little things like that.

Go watch the making of video.

First of all, the first time you see that guy fire the pistol is the first time he EVER fired one. It was done on purpose. It was to help relate to your average firearm owner who likely bought a gun to use for defense, maybe put a box of ammo through it, and stuck it in the safe until it was needed. They even said they casted him because he wasn't LE or military (and most of the people who went to the casting call were), didn't look LE or military, and had almost no firearm experience.

Secondly, honestly, the video wasn't made for you. It wasn't made for gun owners. It was made for the people who are undecided on the issue of standard capacity magazines. Most of those people don't have a whole lot of experience, if any, and couldn't be able to tell the difference between 9mm and 50AE if you held them side by side.

Quote:

Not to derail the thread, but how many of your DA, semi auto., handguns,
can you dry fire, with the slide locked back ?

Same thing as above. Very few people outside of firearm owners understand what a locked back slide means. Almost everyone who's ever watched a movie/TV show where there's some kind of a gun fight understands precisely what that "click" means.

Good response, Gaerek. Your analysis seems to have been a thread stopper.

Possibly because it was the correct analysis!

The whole point of the PSA was to show what could happen to an ordinary family. You know, the Dad has a gun, but has never really trained or given self defense more than a second thought, after he purchased the gun.

Add to this that if you actually count the shots fired, there weren't 10, there were 7. Remind anyone of a recently enacted law? Given the paucity of training by the majority of gun owners, this scenario is all too likely... Even to the flinching and closed eyes. The PSA also shows the fallacy of the One-Stop-Shot.

Many good things to take away from this, but only if you look at who this is targeted. Trust me. It ain't us!

Add to this that if you actually count the shots fired, there weren't 10, there were 7. Remind anyone of a recently enacted law?

I made that connection immediately. The message this PSA was pushing was very clear, even to people who don't know guns. I think the message will be lost on those who think guns are evil, and kill people willy nilly, but for the fence sitter? It should have a powerful message.

Quote:

Skans? 22's??? Take another look.

I was going to give him the benefit of the doubt, knowing that they just dropped spent casings for that particular shot. So I went back to watch it again, and the casings eject too fast to be able to get a good idea of the size. All you see is a quick glint of brass. However, the last shot is slow motion and although it's touch to see, it does appear to be bigger than a .22. It appears a but long, but that's likely because they're blanks, so the crimp is going to make the round slightly longer.

I'm going to go with he was using a larger caliber round (9mm is most likely) firing blanks. I can't see any evidence to the contrary.

__________________
Jim's Rules of Carry: 1. Any gun is better than no gun. 2. A gun that is reliable is better than a gun that is not. 3. A hole in the right place is better than a hole in the wrong place. 4. A bigger hole is a better hole.

Lately, the one thing that I find disapointing about these current debates, is the disunity expressed by suppesdly, 2A supporters, NRA members and gunowners, in general. Now, I personally do not find the "Black-Guns" all that attractive as well as 30-round magazines but I certainly would not deny folks from owning them. Some of us would. .....

During a recent conversation with a NRA lifer, hunter and competition shooter. He stated that in a perfect world, no one needs a 30-round magazine. My reply was; In a perfect world, the capacity would not matter. All could be trusted with a drum magazine. ....

Stand your ground and;Be Safe !!!

__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing.

Lastly, 'hi-cap magazine', to me, is about as defineable, as 'paying your fair share', which the nation has yet to hear an actual dollar figure put to that nonsense, either!

We're slowly moving from American Hi-Cap fair shares to the French standard.

I will not surrender 75% of my hard earned hi-capacity

__________________
I told the new me,
"Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'"
But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back."
Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor

Thank you for posting the video. I copied and pasted that to my "revolver" buds who say "You'll never need more than 5-6 shots."

I ONLY have high capacity semi's for personal defense, the exception of "high capacity" being the KelTec's we have. The double stacks like the Glocks, the XD-45, the Beretta 92FS, etc are what I consider my personal carry / primary home defense pistols.

This has been repeated a zillion times, but it's so true......"Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it." My grandpap drilled that into my head in the 1960's and I never forgot it. Nor could I argue against it.

__________________
2 Thes 3:16 "Now may the Lord of peace Himself continually grant you peace in every circumstance. The Lord be with you all! "

Depends on what one defines as "need." A CCW holder does not need a high capacity magazine, but LEOs and military do as they may be involved in a prolonged gun fight. They might not have time to reload.

BUT, when has "need" been the criterion for legally owning anything? I suspect that the anti-gunners have cars that they don't need and many other things. The rich have vacation houses that they don't need, but they enjoy them and can afford them so have at it.

I don't care for AK 47s and certainly do not need one, but if I wanted one that fact should not legally prohibit me from purchasing it.

Jerry

__________________
Ecclesiastes 12:13 *¶Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
14 *For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

I hope they do another video that shows that a double barrelled shotgun is not enough gun for defense.

Of the gun community, those who post online are probably the minority. Of those who post, most appear to feel they are able to hit the 10 ring 999 times out of 1000.

The reality is, none of us know what will happen when we are faced with such a scenario. We can guess and estimate, and all we are really doing is hoping that the time we spent shooting at paper targets will have done us some good.

__________________
"Every man alone is sincere; at the entrance of a second person hypocrisy begins." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Soren Kierkegaard

Depends on what one defines as "need." A CCW holder does not need a high capacity magazine, but LEOs and military do as they may be involved in a prolonged gun fight. They might not have time to reload.

Without a specific detailed scenario in mind, you can't give a ballpark number of how many rounds you might need.

I don't need X rounds. I need as many rounds as I can get to ensure that I have the best chance of survival in arbitrary self defense scenarios. We don't get to choose if, where, when, and how we'll have to use a gun in self defense.

If I pick a gun that's limited to 6 rounds, or 7+1, so be it. That's a functional trade-off in gun design and round effectiveness. What I think is criminally stupid is artificial limitation on magazine capacity for a gun when its flush-fitting magazines are designed/capable of holding more.

__________________“The egg hatched...” “...the egg hatched... and a hundred baby spiders came out...” (blade runner)
“Who are you?” “A friend. I'm here to prevent you from making a mistake.” “You have no idea what I'm doing here, friend.” “In specific terms, no, but I swore an oath to protect the world...” (continuum)
“It's a goal you won't understand until later. Your job is to make sure he doesn't achieve the goal.” (bsg)

Since when does "need" (especially when that "need" is defined by some disinterested desk jockey in the .gov) have diddly squat to do the excercise of a Right ? And most especially, a right that the COTUS specificly protects form such meddling by said .gov?

If we have lost the average Citizen on this point, all the rest of our arguments are moot.

Either we live in a Constitutional Republic under the Rule of Law, or we are ruled by the guys with the best hair and PR people.

__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

Which is why I keep a Benelli autoloader next to my AK-47 with a full magazine.

__________________
A Colt Python's trigger pull is as smooth, beautiful and artistic as a Sidewinder sliding on the desert floor. It is concepts like this that the anti-gunners can never comprehend and why we fight so hard to keep them.
NRA Benefactor Life member

The problem with this whole arguement (both sides) is picking an arbitrary number and using it to define a standard is a non starter.

I don't *need* three dogs. I have three dogs. I could be a really crappy dog owner and should have no dogs, or I could be a really awesome dog owner and should/could have a lot more dogs.
Establishing a number as too how many dogs I should have is silly, as it doesn't nessasrly factor into the quality of my canine ownership.
Same goes for cars, guns, tools, whatevers.

As firearm ownership is a constitutionally protected right of American citizens, placing an arbitrary number is ultimatly meaningless and an infringment of that right.

Any debat or BS over "how many rounds do you need"? defeats the ultimate point we are trying to make which is "This is our right, and our rights shall not be defined by what you think I *need*."

Furthermore, bad guys arn't going to be limited by any silly "hi capacity" maginzine law any more then they'd be limited by any gun ban, so saying that there's some supposed benifit there is just flat out stupid.

(for the record, I'm a very good dog owner and they are very happy dogs )

Whatever the case this scenario should clarify things very clearly for people who are ambivalent and listen to the latest anti-gun du jour.

__________________
A Colt Python's trigger pull is as smooth, beautiful and artistic as a Sidewinder sliding on the desert floor. It is concepts like this that the anti-gunners can never comprehend and why we fight so hard to keep them.
NRA Benefactor Life member

That said, it is often proclaimed that 'the pen is mightier than the sword'. So, by anti-gun logic, it would follow that "high capacity" speech should be curtailed. Mainstream media should only get 500words per article, no? Or maybe 200words? Why would they need more? Think of where all those stray words are going! Surely they don't need 10,000 words or more! That's just crazy!

And keyboards should be banned. Most of them are assault keyboards, although manual typewriters could be grandfathered in. But nobody needs anything but a pen or pencil to express himself. And a PPOID should be required to buy anything except a Magic Marker.

__________________"Once the writer in every individual comes to life (and that time is not far off), we are in for an age of universal deafness and lack of understanding."
(Milan Kundera, Book of Laughter and Forgetting, 1980)

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.